I definitely agree with the proposition that better performance equals more cost, but I'm okay with this because I personally want to see more innovation, and I'm willing to pay more cost, at least within reason ....

I also understand that there are others that don't share my thinking, and who prefer to maintain current levels of performance, (if possible ...) and move to lower cost.

However, I'm thinking (hoping actually ...) that we don't have to choose between these contrary objectives, and that there are options for us to consider that would drive innovation in the upper classes, (Masters, and f3a ...) and also reduce cost in the lower classes. Of course I don't quite know what these options might be, but these are the high level objectives that I would like to achieve with any proposed rule change.